The Quality of Lecturer-Student Interaction as Predictors of Academic Achievement and Percieved Learning with Emotional Engagement as Mediator
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.14421/jpsi.v10i1.2456Keywords:
Academic Achievement, Emotional Engagement, Lecturer-Student Interaction, Perceived LearningAbstract
This study aimed to examine the fitness of a model that proposes the relationship between the quality of student-teacher interaction as predictors of academic achievement and perceived learning with emotional engagement as a mediator. Lecture-student interactions as the exogenous variable were measured with the Lecturer-student Interaction (LSI) questionnaire that contains four aspects: autonomy support, emotional support, academic support, and the framework used to measure the quality of lecturer-student interaction. The emotional involvements of students during lectures as the endogenous variable are the emotions (pleasure, boredom, despair, anger, hope, anxiety) that are often expressed in the lecture process. Emotional engagement is considered as the mediator variable. Perceived learning as the dependent variable is related to the ability of lecturers to arouse students' curiosity about the lecture material. The second dependent variable is academic achievement which is determined by the cumulative index report (GPA) from the previous semester. 270 students from many universities in Indonesia filled out the questionnaire. The conceptual model proposed in this study is incompatible with empirical data in the field. In the first model, lecturer-student interaction influences perceived learning mediated by emotional engagement because lecturer-student interaction will only significantly influence perceived learning through emotional engagement (full mediation). Directly and through mediation of emotional involvement, the influence of lecturer-student interaction variables is not significant on academic achievement. In the modified model, lecturer-student interaction influences perceived learning with emotional engagement and also significantly influences perceived learning without emotional involvement variables (partial mediation). The dynamics of the lecturer-student interaction relationship, emotional engagement, and academic achievement in this modified model remain the same as the first model.
Abstrak. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menguji kesesuaian model yang mengusulkan hubungan antara kualitas interaksi siswa-guru sebagai prediktor prestasi akademik dan pembelajaran yang dirasakan dengan keterlibatan emosional sebagai mediator. Interaksi dosen-mahasiswa sebagai variabel eksogen diukur dengan kuesioner Interaksi Dosen-Mahasiswa (LSI) yang memuat empat aspek: dukungan otonomi, dukungan emosional, dukungan akademik, dan kerangka yang digunakan untuk mengukur kualitas interaksi dosen-mahasiswa. Keterlibatan emosional mahasiswa selama perkuliahan sebagai variabel endogen adalah emosi (senang, bosan, putus asa, marah, harap, cemas) yang sering diungkapkan dalam proses perkuliahan. Keterlibatan emosional dianggap sebagai variabel mediator. Persepsi pembelajaran sebagai variabel terikat berkaitan dengan kemampuan dosen membangkitkan rasa ingin tahu mahasiswa terhadap materi perkuliahan. Variabel terikat kedua adalah prestasi akademik yang ditentukan oleh Indeks Prestasi Kumulatif (IPK) semester sebelumnya. 270 mahasiswa dari berbagai universitas di Indonesia mengisi kuesioner. Model konseptual yang diajukan dalam penelitian ini tidak sesuai dengan data empiris di lapangan. Pada model pertama, interaksi dosen-mahasiswa mempengaruhi persepsi pembelajaran yang dimediasi oleh emotional engagement karena interaksi dosen-mahasiswa hanya akan berpengaruh signifikan terhadap persepsi pembelajaran melalui emotional engagement (full mediation). Secara langsung dan melalui mediasi keterlibatan emosional, pengaruh variabel interaksi dosen-mahasiswa tidak signifikan terhadap prestasi belajar. Pada model yang dimodifikasi, interaksi dosen-mahasiswa mempengaruhi pembelajaran yang dirasakan dengan keterlibatan emosional dan juga secara signifikan mempengaruhi variabel pembelajaran yang dirasakan tanpa keterlibatan emosional (mediasi parsial). Dinamika hubungan interaksi dosen-mahasiswa, emosional engagement, dan prestasi akademik pada model modifikasi ini tetap sama dengan model pertama.
Downloads
References
Ainley, M. (2004). What do we know about student motivation and engagement ? Australian Association for Research in Education, 1–13.
Ainley, M., & Ainley, J. (2011). Student engagement with science in early adolescence: The contribution of enjoyment to students’ continuing interest in learning about science. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 36(1), 4–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2010.08.001
Ang, R. (2005). Development and validation of the teacher-student relationship inventory using exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis. Journal of Experimental Education, 74(1), 55–73. https://doi.org/10.3200/JEXE.74.1.55-74
Appleton, J. J., Christenson, S. L., Kim, D., & Reschly, A. L. (2006). Measuring cognitive and psychological engagement: Validation of the Student Engagement Instrument. Journal of School Psychology, 44(5), 427–445. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2006.04.002
Artino, A. R. (2009). Online learning: Are subjective perceptions of instructional context related to academic success? Internet and Higher Education, 12(3–4), 117–125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2009.07.003
Barkatsas, A. (Tasos), Kasimatis, K., & Gialamas, V. (2009). Learning secondary mathematics with technology: Exploring the complex interrelationship between students’ attitudes, engagement, gender and achievement. Computers and Education, 52(3), 562–570. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2008.11.001
Birch, S. H., & Ladd, G. W. (1997). The teacher-child relationship and children’s early school adjustment. Journal of School Psychology, 35(1), 61–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-4405(96)00029-5
Chapman, E. (2003). Alternative approaches to assessing student engagement rates. Practical Assessment, Research and Evaluation, 8(13), 2002–2003.
Fraser, B. J., & Fisher, D. L. (1982). Predicting Students’ Outcomes from Their Perceptions of Classroom Psychosocial Environment. American Educational Research Journal, 19(4), 498–518. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312019004498
Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School Engagement Potential of the Concept. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 59–109. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543074001059
Frenzel, A. C., Thrash, T. M., Pekrun, R., & Goetz, T. (2007). Achievement emotions in Germany and China: A cross-cultural validation of the academic emotions questionnaire-mathematics. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 38(3), 302–309. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022107300276
Furlong, M. J., Whipple, A. D., St. Jean, G., Simental, J., Soliz, A., & Punthuna, S. (2003). Multiple Contexts of School Engagement: Moving Toward a Unifying Framework for Educational Research and Practice. The California School Psychologist, 8(1), 99–113. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf03340899
Hagenauer, G., & Volet, S. E. (2014). Teacher-student relationship at university: an important yet under-researched field. Oxford Review of Education, 40(3), 370–388. https://doi.org/10.1080/03054985.2014.921613
Handelsman, M. M., Briggs, W. L., Sullivan, N., & Towler, A. (2005). A Measure of College Student Course Engagement. Journal of Educational Research, 98(3), 184–192. https://doi.org/10.3200/JOER.98.3.184-192
Hughes, J., & Kwok, O. M. (2007). Influence of student-teacher and parent-teacher relationships on lower achieving readers’ engagement and achievement in the primary grades. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99(1), 39–51. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.99.1.39
Jang, H., Reeve, J., & Deci, E. L. (2010). Engaging Students in Learning Activities: It is Not Autonomy Support or Structure but Autonomy Support and Structure. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102(3), 588–600. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019682
Jimerson, S. R., Campos, E., & Greif, J. L. (2003). Toward an Understanding of Definitions and Measures of School Engagement and Related Terms. The California School Psychologist, 8(1), 7–27. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf03340893
Klem, A. M., & Connell, J. P. (2004). Relationships matter: Linking teacher support to student engagement and achievement. Journal of School Health, 74(7), 262–273. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1746-1561.2004.tb08283.x
Ladd, G. W., Birch, S. H., & Buhs, E. S. (1999). Children’s social and scholastic lives in kindergarten: Related spheres of influence? Child Development, 70(6), 1373–1400. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8624.00101
Ladd, G. W., & Dinella, L. M. (2009). Continuity and Change in Early School Engagement: Predictive of Children’s Achievement Trajectories From First to Eighth Grade? Journal of Educational Psychology, 101(1), 190–206. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013153
Lam, S. F., Jimerson, S., Kikas, E., Cefai, C., Veiga, F. H., Nelson, B., … Zollneritsch, J. (2012). Do girls and boys perceive themselves as equally engaged in school? The results of an international study from 12 countries. Journal of School Psychology, 50(1), 77–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2011.07.004
Lindblom-Ylänne, S., Trigwell, K., Nevgi, A., & Ashwin, P. (2006). How approaches to teaching are affected by discipline and teaching context. Studies in Higher Education, 31(3), 285–298. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070600680539
Miller, R. B., Greene, B. A., Montalvo, G. P., Ravindran, B., & Nichols, J. D. (1996). Engagement in academic work: The role of learning goals, future consequences, pleasing others, and perceived ability. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 21(4), 388–422. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1996.0028
Patrick, H., Ryan, A. M., & Kaplan, A. (2007). Early adolescents’ perceptions of the classroom social environment, motivational beliefs, and engagement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99(1), 83–98. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.99.1.83
Pekrun, R., Goetz, T., Frenzel, A. C., Barchfeld, P., & Perry, R. P. (2011). Measuring emotions in students’ learning and performance: The Achievement Emotions Questionnaire (AEQ). Contemporary Educational Psychology, 36(1), 36–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2010.10.002
Reddy, R., Rhodes, J. E., & Mulhall, P. (2003). The influence of teacher support on student adjustment in the middle school years: A latent growth curve study. Development and Psychopathology, 15(1), 119–138. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954579403000075
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2018). Investigating reading culture among students in higher learning institutions in Tanzania. University of Dar Es Salaam Library Journal, 13(1), 04–19.
Sagayadevan, V., & Jeyaraj, S. (2012). The role of emotional engagement in lecturer-student interaction and the impact on academic outcomes of student achievement and learning. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 12(3), 1–30. Retrieved from http://josotl.indiana.edu/article/view/2152/2057
Sinclair, M. F., Christenson, S. L., Lehr, C. A., & Anderson, A. R. (2003). Facilitating Student Engagement: Lessons Learned from Check & Connect Longitudinal Studies. The California School Psychologist, 8(1), 29–41. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf03340894
Skinner, E. A., Wellborn, J. G., & Connell, J. P. (1990). What It Takes to Do Well in School and Whether I’ve Got It: A Process Model of Perceived Control and Children’s Engagement and Achievement in School. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(1), 22–32. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.82.1.22
Skinner, E., Belmont, M. J., Lynch, M., Mellor-crummey, C., Miserandino, M., Patrick, B., … Usinger, P. (1993). skinner1993Motivation in the Classroom.pdf, 85(4), 571–581.
Skinner, E., Furrer, C., Marchand, G., & Kindermann, T. (2008). Engagement and Disaffection in the Classroom: Part of a Larger Motivational Dynamic? Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(4), 765–781. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0012840
Strauss, L. C., & Volkwein, J. F. (2004). Predictors of Student Commitment at Two-Year and Four-Year Institutions. The Journal of Higher Education, 75(2), 203–227. https://doi.org/10.1353/jhe.2004.0007
Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. S. (2000). Expectancy-value theory of achievement motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(1), 68–81. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1999.1015
Yamnill, S., & McLean, G. N. (2001). Theories supporting transfer of training. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 12(2), 195–208. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrdq.7
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
.png)
